Evidence Hub

Optimal kidney-tonifying traditional chinese medicines for postmenopausal osteoporosis: A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Zhong X, Li L, Wan W

Journal of clinical densitometry : the official journal of the International Society for Clinical Densitometry, 2025

1,360 participants

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of different kidney-tonifying Chinese medicines (KTCMs) combined with bisphosphonates (BPs) in postmenopausal osteoporosis (PMOP) patients.

METHODS: This study included 15 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving a total of 1,360 PMOP patients to compare the efficacy and safety of various KTCMs combined with BPs. A systematic search was conducted in eight medical databases (CNKI, PUBMED, Web of Science, Cochrane, EMBASE, Wanfang, VIP, and TCM Online). The inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) participants were postmenopausal women with PMOP; (2) the intervention involved different KTCMs combined with BPs; (3) outcome measures included pain Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores, lumbar spine bone mineral density (BMD), femoral neck BMD, serum osteocalcin levels, and the incidence of adverse events. A network meta-analysis was performed to integrate data, calculating mean differences (MD) with 95 % confidence intervals (CIs). SUCRA values were used to rank treatment efficacy and assess the relative advantages of different regimens. League tables were used to visually present direct and indirect comparisons of treatments, while funnel plots were used to evaluate publication bias. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool.

RESULTS: GSK + BPs and JWEX + BPs were the most effective in pain relief, while GSK + BPs showed the best efficacy in improving lumbar spine and femoral neck BMD. LWDH…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 1,360 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free